View Full Version : *My 7-point Sort Out Brixton plan!
1. Stick some huge, fuck-off lights along the dimly-lit, lone-female-worrying, drug dealer infested Electric Lane and Electric Avenue
2. Stick some huge, fuck-off lights along the stretch of Coldharbour Lane to Brixton Road
3. Install some urinals on Electric Avenue (by Iceland) as the place stinks of piss and always has done.
4. Put up a big sign that tells you the times and destinations of the overground trains at Brixton BR station
5. Put another big sign by the tube station - most people haven't a clue when and where the BR trains go
6. Rebuild the old Brixton BR third platform and the old Loughborough Park BR station on Coldharbour Lane (corner w/Barrington Rd) to allow direct route to Peckham, Lewisham etc
7. Fix the water that has dripped down on pedestrians from the rail bridge by the Dogstar since at least 1991
I'm sure you've all got some more to add to this list...!
I'd add:
Improve the lighting in the sqaure outside the Ritzy. The lights in the tree are pretty bu don't cast much light. Needn't be harsh. I recall seeing a square in France where they had very bright lights shining up into the trees. The light reflected back down was bright, but soft and dappled, if you can imagine.
Also, sort out the bus stops along the High Street, grouping common destinations together and if needs be narrowing the road and widening the pavement.
Good ideas all IMHO. Pooka - Tate Gardens and Windrush Square are due to be integrated into one new public space soon. Believe it when you see it but some of the plans look quite exciting.
Pedestrianise the whole place.
"But where would the traffic / buses go?"
D'OH!
Sensible suggestions all, but what about those poor bastards roughing it outside the tube and elsewhere? I know this is a 'national problem' but it seems particularly pronounced here!
I think, ultimately, the only solution involves spendiong money - ie taxing people - but we all know how that sort of suggestion tends to make too many people jittery.
Yeah i was threatened with arrest yesterday morning for stepping in to help one of that crowd.Two coppers were telling a homeless girl who was sheltering under a tree in bin liner "You'll have to move along love or we'll have to arrest you,the residents are sick of you lot"
I tell him "Excuse i'm a resident and it does'nt bother me if this lady wants to sit under this tree"
to which he replied"Look do't get involved inthis or we'll arrest you n'all"
Fucking Wankers.:mad:
*make the children playground on atlantic road more accessible and nicer.
*clean atlantic road and elecric lane and ave once with high-pressure whatever and then install the urinals as suggested by mike!
*fix the loose tiles on CHL and atlantic rd on the pavement cause if it rains, the yulky water splashes up your ankles!
*take the rubbish out from beneath loughborough junction bridge, just below the railtracks, it looks sheit!
*give brixton library a big fund to buy more books.
*and as suggested before pedestrianise CHL and ideally atlantic road as well.
*find a soultion for brixtons roughsleepers.
IntoStella
09-08-2002, 13:13
* Remove the obstructive and illegally constructed 'drinking deck' from outside Living bar on CHL.
hatboy: yeah, I heard about that at the Brixton Forum meeting I went to the other week (concerned citizen that I've become!). It's tied up with the Black History museum is it not? Sounded like it might be a while coming.
dum dum: At the same meeting, there were near hysterical (verbal) attacks on the police, from a broad cross section of people, for not doing anything about rough sleepers/addicts in the centre of Brixton. One group had brought kids along to add to their complaints. In fairness, they were also asking that proper provision be made for helping such people. The Superintendent responsible was left under no illusions about what people wanted. So, perhaps the police actions you saw related to that? They are a bit dammed if they do, dammed if they don't.
The Town Centre Manager pointed out that whereas many areas of London had seen a fall in rough sleeping, Lambeth (and Brixton in particular) had seen a rise. She said this was pricipally because of the closure of Bondway nightshelter at Vauxhall Cross. Bondway have opened a nice new hostel just across the road from where they were, but I don't think you can just turn up there. She also said that roughsleepers/beggars are attracted to Brixton because local people are generous.
Structaural
09-08-2002, 14:38
blow mcdonalds and KFC (nee pizza hut) to smithereens... Brixton lost a lot of style when they went up. Gives too much refuge for the crack-'eds.
Ban parking on Coldharbour Lane, Make the whole of brixton road single lane and widen the pavements.
Turn the Living room back into a real pub, open a shop called the One Stop Crack Shop to get the dealers off the streets.
More clowns and street people, better quality drugs and cut down that tree in front of the Rizty so I can see what's on when I go past on the bus (joke!)
Robinson
09-08-2002, 17:33
Yes - put in platforms on the overground high level line so Brixton can be back on the South London Line (providing direct link to Denmark Hill, Peckham and London Bridge). Overall Brixton overground should be 'reintegrated' with the town centre through signage and design.
Return Bradys to its former grungy glory - central Brixton needs a mental meeting place where every type of Brixtonian, dreamer, loser and freak can collide in a volatile, drunken haze
Or alternatively restore the original Prince of Wales through compulsory purchasing the KFC
Open up the grounds of St Mathews and extend it right across the road to the Ritzy creating a new park big enough for everyone to feel comfortable
"Return Bradys to its former grungy glory - central Brixton needs a mental meeting place where every type of Brixtonian, dreamer, loser and freak can collide in a volatile, drunken haze"
Good turn of phrase there Robinson. Those are the people I like. I agree. Unfortunately, if you look around on these boards you'll see that Brady's gig room is due for demolition. Obviously the place will never be what it was, but it's an ideal central venue for bands and events provided the back room remains and it's still a pub. Since the first draft Lanbeth Unitary Development Plan talked of protecting pubs is it worth mountng any sort of campaign?
Interesting to see all these ideas come up.I used to go to Brixton Forum meetings but gave up in the end.My opinions were not appreciated as a long term Brixton resident by the town centre management.The forum was supposed to help sort out these problems as well as planning for the future of Brixton.The way it was set up is flawed.The impression is that it is "our " forum however all the town centre mge work for the council and in the end are accountability to the council.The forum magazine reads like a PR exercise for the council.
An example is the Tate gardens /windrush square/Raleigh building.Last year the Town centre mge said that the Forum was moving to be "project based".This project was started by the council as one if those projects.I did object when this started to reduce time taken on discussion of issues.I felt that the council wanted the forum to be project based because to many people were complaining about services ,asset sales etc.
Also I know people living in Saltoun road are not happy with the scheme as they (rightly) feel that it could extend the problems in Coldharbour lane to them.You never see these opinions in the Forum magazine.
In my view Brixton has had enough of schemes etc and the basics should be sorted out first.I remember when the Tate gardens and the Brixton overground were refurbished(under Brixton Challenge I think).Whilst the architecture was poor it was an improvement.The trouble is after a wad of money is spent their is then no ongoing maintenence.The Tate gardens and St Matthews Peace garden(this gets forgotten)look bad because there is no proper garden maintenance.In the long run money would be saved in Brixton if a longer term maintenance program and smaller changes were made instead of grandiose projects every ten years.This would also make it easier for localpeople to control democratically.
Another problem I had with the Brixton forum was their was a lot of Daily Mail type attitudes expressed.It was difficult for a soft gaurdian reading liberal like me to say anything.Take drugs a lot of the worst problems in Brixton are due to drugs.However I am for legalisation as taking it out of the hands of gangsters will reduce the problem of street crime and anti social behaviour.I also believe that drugs can be used recreationally with the right info.Saying this in public can lead to condemnation and put one beyond the pale.
Originally posted by pooka
The Town Centre Manager pointed out that whereas many areas of London had seen a fall in rough sleeping, Lambeth (and Brixton in particular) had seen a rise. She said this was pricipally because of the closure of Bondway nightshelter at Vauxhall Cross.
It may also be because they feel safer in Brixton than elsewhere. Mrs Magpie has befriended a young homeless woman who lives in the centre of Brixton. She used to be based in Soho, but left because of the level of aggression and sexual exploitation she found. eg One pisshead found it amusing to kick her in the face so that she lost both her front teeth.
Brixton is a safer, more tolerant place to be homeless in.
Mrs Magpie
10-08-2002, 15:23
Actually it was several teeth, but not the front ones...it was a Hooray Henry with an empty wine bottle, although she had kickings on other occasions. People in Brixton don't deliberately piss on people when they are asleep in doorways either. She says Brixton is really safe compared to other areas partly because of all the CCTV, and partly because we are just nicer people.
Plant high explosives at strategic points, light fuse and stand well away.
twisted nerve
12-08-2002, 10:08
6. Rebuild the old Brixton BR third platform and the old Loughborough Park BR station on Coldharbour Lane (corner w/Barrington Rd) to allow direct route to Peckham, Lewisham etc
bring the Victoria line overground between Brixton BR and Herne Hill BR, to extend the line south-east.
this would ease congestion at Brixton tube, due to a reduction in the number of people travelling to Brixton tube by bus from Dulwich, Crystal Palace, Herne Hill, etc.
I'd suggest the Council, LUL, Transport for London and Railtrack/Franchise holder get together to build a new Station for Brixton on the site of the old Iceland, with entrances to Coldharbour Lane via vacant Council properties and Brixton Station Rd. Pedestrianise all of Brixton Station Rd, Atlantic Rd (Below Coldharbour Lane Junction) Electric Avenue & Lane. Make whole area extended Market area, with new Station and connections to platforms etc above. Renovation of all railway arches as market stall holders storage included in plan.
Take Team Lambeth back under Council control and make sure central Brixton is kept clean of fly tipping etc.
Install Amsterdam style urinals for late night around Brixton and install new public toilets in new Station. Renovate and re-open all closed public toilets
Renovate and turn into open homeless hostel and drug counselling service one of the empty Council premises along Coldharbour Lane. Other empty property to become a Community Centre with resources for youth & unemployed.
Improve street lighting throughout central Brixton. Remove all sodium (Orange) street lights and replace with energy efficient and light pollution reducing fixtures which actually give white light or daylight-corrected light.
Steve Bush,
Lambeth Socialist Party.
"Renovate and turn into open homeless hostel and drug counselling service one of the empty Council premises along Coldharbour Lane. Other empty property to become a Community Centre with resources for youth & unemployed."
Do you live on Coldharbour Lane?
Call me a NIMBY if you like, but I'm fed up with watching junkies openly injecting themselves in front of my flat and leaving their needles where the kids play.
Only last week, the council were forced to mail all the people in my block to warn them of junkies and crackheads gaining entry to the block and trashing the place: so much so that the fire exit is now out of bounds - and I won't detail what the staircase looks/smells like!
I'm all for the establishment of proper, well funded and comprehensive drug help services, but I don't think slapping them right in the middle of the drug dealing capital of the town would be the most productive way forward - nor the most welcome choice for long, long suffering residents.
Treating addicts would be, IMO, far more effective if they were taken away from the immense temptation of Coldharbour Lane, where hussling dealers provide a ready supply of the drug and fellow addicts are quick to encourage users back on the brown.
I'll call you a NIMBY. But I take your point. However, surely that's the reason FOR putting it on Coldharbour Lane. I don't much enjoy stepping over needles & junkies to get into my office either, isn't that precisely the point to providing them with somewhere to go and get help? Provision of clean needles, sharps disposal, medical help, and I would suggest prescription of clean heroin or crack as well for addicts on a programme to get off them, so that they wouldn't need the dealers anymore.
The Police could then remove people from your flats to the hostel - rather than ignoring them because they can't do anything but put them in a cell.
I'd suggest these buildings because of their location and the fact that the Council already own them.
While we're at it, proper cleaning services & security for Council accommodation?
Steve Bush,
Lambeth Socialist Party.
Where do you live, Steve? Why aren't you suggesting that they build these centres next to your house or in your street?
Coldharbour Lane's got more than enough problems as it is and putting a drug treatment centre in a street crawling with dealers seems like madness to me.
And what about the long suffering residents? Do you think they'll welcome the prospect of even more junkies in the area?
FYI, there were already places for the 'provision of clean needles and sharps disposal' provided for several years on Coldharbour Lane: right outside my house as it happens.
The clean needles were dispensed from the chemist opposite (now closed) and the sharps box is still bolted on the wall of my block.
But guess what? That didn't stop the majority of users openly injecting in a residential area, shitting/pissing/dumping rubbish all over the small patch of green outside and - worst of all - leaving their needles scattered all over the grass, right where kids play.
Loughborough Park opposite is now dangerously littered with needles, we've got crack heads hassling residents and kicking in the doors of the block (the residents now have to pay extra for the 24hr concierge) and the fire escapes are all trashed by drug crazed nutters.
I think Coldharbour Lane could use some other kind of development right now....
(On a general note: I am for the prescription of clean heroin coupled with a well-funded treatment, health, education and after-care support program designed to get addicts off the drug. And punitive penalties for the fuckers selling the shit.).
I'm precisely not suggesting that somewhere be provided where I live because it's not Coldharbour Lane. As you illustrate, and those of us who live & work amongst it every day know only too well THIS is the problem area. THIS is where the problem needs to be dealt with. Or are you suggesting we put them all in cattle trucks & take them to Poland?
What 'other kind of development' do you have in mind, Mike? Do you seriously think that the Hotel, branch of Waitrose, and 'boulevard' proposed in Lambeth's UDP are going to improve the situation?
The problem won't go away without being dealt with. Where in Brixton, within staggering distance of where these people are, do you suggest?
Steve Bush,
Lambeth Socialist Party.
Most people rough sleep in Brixton purely for the proximity, proliferation, strength and value of the drugs that they are reliant on. I have worked with rough sleepers for a number of years and have seen characters from such famous spots as Kings Cross moving to Brixton to take advantage of this market. Goods can be shoplifted in Brixton Rd, sold in the market in Electric lane and the cash exchanged for drugs in Atlantic road before being consumed in any one of a dozen dank corners yards from the town centre. Convenient ? YES! Also most of the rough sleepers in Brixton get treated like shit primarily by their dealers who find it very amusing to give an 8 stone Junkie a good smack in the face before he gets his gear. They are verbally and physically abused as par for the course and take it for granted as part of the life they lead. The dealers are the Scum of the Scum I only wish they would wipe each other out, they prey on and make their money from some of the most desperate people in our society. Oh! and whilst we're at it Brixton could do with a bus station so you could actually walk on the pavements sometimes:mad:
Face it: you don't give a fucking shit about the people who live on Coldharbour Lane, do you?
We've already got more drug dealers/bad boys/crackheads per square inch than anywhere else in Brixton, yet you seem to think a scheme to attract even more is a good thing.
If addicts want to get helped off their addiction, it would appear to me to be stunningly obvious that you put them in a treatment centre somewhere out of the sphere of influence of those who prey on them.
I say: take them out of the circumstances that are feeding their problems and addiction and give them proper treatment and counselling in a way that makes it less likely for them to be drawn back in.
What's the point of undergoing a counselling session if the second you walk out of the place there's a mass of dealers offering you smack and all your junkie pals around offering you more?
That's like an alcoholic trying to give up drinking while living in a pub stuck in a permanent happy hour.
And tell me this: why should the residents of CL have to put up with the likes of you - presumably living somewhere much nicer and safer - telling them that they should have yet more addicts dumped on them?
If you're that concerned, why not suggest some nice properties round your area, free from dealers and crack heads?
For once, I have some sympathy with Trotboy's point. I don't think a treatment centre as such would be a good idea for CHL, for all sorts of reasons, not least getting people away from temptation must be an important aspect of treatment.
But a 24h information/drop in place would be useful, ideally where people could self refer for treatment and get transport to a centre there and then. People who's lives are seriously deranged by drugs need to have services taken to them - they're often just not organised enough to read leaflets, book appointments, get themselves across town and so on.
Moreover, such a place would send out an important signal that Brixton is not simply acquiesing to the activities of the dealers. A stroll down CHL most evenings, and it doesn't feel like that.
Incidentally, it was reported at the Brixton Forum meeting that Lambeth has received £1.2m to spend on anti-crack measures, which has to be spent by next March. They're planning a meeting ('fraid so, but open I believe) in October to decide what to do with it.
But an information/drop in place would be useful, ideally where people could self refer for treatment and get transport to a centre there and then Now that I have no problem with, although I'd suggest that such a centre should be in a highly visible location (like the High Road by the tube station), so that incoming addicts could immediately get good advice.
I don't give a shit about the people who live on Coldharbour Lane? For fuck's sake, Mike, I know you get worked up by the fact there's the word 'Socialist' at the end of my posts, but that's a bit thick, frankly. Several members of our Party live on the Moorlands Estate. I don't, I live in Wandsworth, do you want me to move to Coldharbour Lane before I give an opinion? My railway arch (Office) is just off Coldharbour Lane, and if I did live here, it wouldn't make any difference to what I'm saying.
You won't get rid of the dealers without removing the demand. You can take dealers off the streets every day & more will be there tomorrow to replace them. You can't treat people away from where they are - away from where they LIVE, in many instances. You won't remove the DEMAND until you get people out of the cycle with treatment and in order to properly control it you have to be able to prescribe them clean drugs. No-one is going to go and get robbed & beaten by a dealer giving them toxic shit when they can get clean drugs prescribed.
So how would this attract more dealers? Do more dealers get attracted by a shrinking market?
It's a fine idea to "take them out of the circumstances that are feeding their problems and addiction and give them proper treatment and counselling in a way that makes it less likely for them to be drawn back in." Very good, let's see the resources being provided to do just that where possible - have a residential centre somewhere else that people can be referred to. Have it in my street in Wandsworth if you want - if you could get Wandsworth Council to agree - there's a vacant derelict property there that would do very nicely.
If you think my one bedroom bedsitter in Wandsworth is nicer than your Council flat then please let's swap! Or at least I would seriously take you up on it if I weren't moving back to Devon next week.
Mike, in case you hadn't noticed, I'm not in power in Lambeth any more than you are. I'm not shouting down your suggestions hysterically, so why are you shouting down mine? Just because I'm a member of the Socialist Party?
Steve Bush,
Lambeth Socialist Party.
Trotboy is correct.
He clearly is not suggesting that: 'a scheme to attract even more [drug dealers/bad boys/crackheads] is a good thing.'
Rather he is advocating some sort of help centre within close proximity to where they are - Cold Harbour Lane.
This is sensible surely? Trotboy has asked you Editor just where you suggest would be a better place, you have not answered him!?
The fact that Cold Harbour Lane is plagued by the dealers and wannabe-gangsters is by the by - getting rid of them is a job for the police and should of course go hand in hand with the setting up of any help centres.
Can't you see that your analogy of the alcoholic trying to kick the drink while living in a pub is flawed? Pubs are legal, smack and crack selling bastards are not, they shouldn't be selling that poison at all!
Removing the victims to elsewhere does smack of NIMBYism. The problem is here so it needs to be dealt with here. I agree with your comments about the need to prescribe clean heroin coupled with a well-funded treatment, health, education and after-care support program designed to get addicts off the drug. And punitive penalties for the fuckers selling the shit - but why not do all that right where the problem is?
(By the way, I live on CHL between Loughborough Junction and Camberwell)
I agree with Mike on this one. Of course you need to treat people where they live, but why in the epicentre of where Brixton's drugs problems are? A drop-in drugs health centre would be far better placed yes, in Brixton, but a bit further out. Coldharbour Lane has got enough on its' plate as it is!
I've got a couple more additions to the wish-list:
- trim back the trees in Josephine Avenue, and put up some really bright street lighting. Sod light pollution, I'm sorry, but this really is a creepy and dangerous road!
- fill up the potholes in the roads PROPERLY. There are so many big potholes that have been 1/2 filled up, for chrissakes! It doesn't take a genius to work that one out! See the hole, fill it entirely with tarmac, and voila! There are loads of potholes round by the Hobgoblin and Brockwell Park which have been filled up in the middle only, so have mini potholes either side. A nightmare for cyclists!
-Collect rubbish on Effra Rd/Tulse Hill more often. The street often resembles a dustbin, with chicken bones etc. scattered all over the street. Revolting.
-Keep the Lido open!
-Have residents parking in the streets around Brockwell park. Lots of people drive into Brixton and use our streets as a carpark, and walk to the tube to get to work in Central London. Grrr!
:mad:
I also wasn't solely suggesting Coldharbour Lane just because it's the epicentre of the problem. Anywhere in central Brixton would do - Mike's suggestion of Brixton Rd would be fine IF there were anywhere available.
The point is that Lambeth Council own two derelict lots on Coldharbour lane MORE THAN big enough to serve these purposes, and their location is ideally suited.
Steve Bush,
Lambeth Socialist Party.
Removing the victims to elsewhere does smack of NIMBYism Oh, for fuck's sake.
I already live with a sharps box on my wall, dealers working outside, crackheads trashing the stairs and needles scattered outside my house, so I really don't need any lectures about NIMBY-ism: try IAIMFBY - It's Already In My Fucking Back Yard!
The simple truth is that the local Chemist providing clean needles resulted in the area in front of my block becoming a shooting gallery, which, in turn, has attracted more junkies and, latterly, crackheads.
I have never seen so many junkies openly injecting as I have in recent months and fail to see how introducing a treatment centre in a densely residential area would improve things.
As for different locations, well, in my dream world there'd be specialist centres out in the countryside where addicts could get full treatment, education, health care and job skills training, away from the dealers.
Naturally, no government is going to commit to that (even though there could be a strong argument that it might even work out cheaper in the long term, considering the immense drain on NHS resources that smack/crack heads create).
So, I'd suggest it would make more sense to have a treatment area in a non-residential area, preferably situated outside the main drug dealing area of Coldharbour Lane, away from preying dealers.
I haven't got a handy list of unused industrial/commercial space to hand, but I would have thought that there's enough of that around...
Robinson
12-08-2002, 15:49
QUOTE]Unfortunately, if you look around on these boards you'll see that Brady's gig room is due for demolition. Obviously the place will never be what it was, but it's an ideal central venue for bands and events provided the back room remains and it's still a pub. Since the first draft Lanbeth Unitary Development Plan talked of protecting pubs is it worth mountng any sort of campaign?
Yes - saw the other threads about Bradys. Looks like it's too late to save it now. If there was a campaign I'd write a letter - but more than that I cannot do. Guess that's often the way with perfect bars - they don't last forever. And we've still got the Windmill!
John Wisehammer
12-08-2002, 18:12
As a confirmed outsider, it would seem to me that what Mike and Trotboy / Steve say represent two sides of "reasonable"** opinion of how to deal with high drugs use areas.
In an ideal world obviously the best thing (IMuninformedO) would be for rehab clinics or hostels to be situated, like Mike says, in non-residential neighbourhoods. Why? Junkies and smackheads are people, but they are people whose behaviour generally has really negative consequences for others around them: theft, violence, general crime scumminess and paraphenalia waste. The "take them out of the drug-using environment" argument seems to make sense too.
However, I suspect the underlying theme of Steve's counterarguments are that it's all very well building the most fantastic treatment places but if they're too far away from where people already are, then truly drug-addled people won't use them, and it will make no change the problems in Brixton.
So I suppose this is where informed people (not me) that know more about junkies and crackheads would come in to enlighten us: how far will hard drug users travel (if at all)? if an area gets cleaned up to some degree (e.g. Kings X), do users just get moved on? is it possible to have hostels/treatment/centres in residential neighbourhoods without murdering the neighbourhood (Camden Town experience?)?
Anyone know? Jonesy - is this your field?
How close is the nearest non-residential area to Brixton? The industrial estate on Milkwood Road? :confused:
**i.e. not Daily Mail-esque counterproductive moronic probihition.
Mike - it seems your block is rapidly deteriorating. I've not heard you mention the users trashing the inside of the building before. In this you have my sincere sympathy (or concern).
I think a centre for addicts is needed in Brixton however. Where exactly I'm not sure, but somewhere here. People in a state of crisis (or just totally fucked) can't even organise themselves to go one stop on the tube half the time so elsewhere wouldn't help those here.
Mrs Magpie
12-08-2002, 19:38
I have to say that I agree with JWH. Both sides of this debate are reasonable. Mike's Estate does have a bad problem with crackheads and junkies, but so does the Loughborough Estate, Angell Town, Stockwell Park, Cowley Estate etc etc. There is not a night when there is peace from these anti-social drug abusers. I too have shit and other detritus on the stairs...the local Housing Office have attempted to 'design out crime' but it's a dismal failure and has made things far, far worse for the tenants, and no impact on the crack and smack heads.
Originally posted by editor
Oh, for fuck's sake...
I already live with a sharps box on my wall, dealers working outside, crackheads trashing the stairs and needles scattered outside my house, so I really don't need any lectures about NIMBY-ism: try IAIMFBY - It's Already In My Fucking Back Yard!
The simple truth is that the local Chemist providing clean needles resulted in the area in front of my block becoming a shooting gallery, which, in turn, has attracted more junkies and, latterly, crackheads.
I have never seen so many junkies openly injecting as I have in recent months and fail to see how introducing a treatment centre in a densely residential area would improve things.
As for different locations, well, in my dream world there'd be specialist centres out in the countryside where addicts could get full treatment, education, health care and job skills training, away from the dealers.
Naturally, no government is going to commit to that (even though there could be a strong argument that it might even work out cheaper in the long term, considering the immense drain on NHS resources that smack/crack heads create).
So, I'd suggest it would make more sense to have a treatment area in a non-residential area, preferably situated outside the main drug dealing area of Coldharbour Lane, away from preying dealers.
I haven't got a handy list of unused industrial/commercial space to hand, but I would have thought that there's enough of that around...
I'm not trying to lecture anyone about NIMBYism. Please bear in mind that all of us who live on CHL are as pissed off about the situation as you are.
So far Editor, you have not provided a convincing alternative to what Trotboy has suggested. You support the creation of help-centres coupled with effective programmes of treatment for drug addicts - but not on our street where they are!
Where then? Just somewhere else, anywhere but here, right?
To be quite frank, it just sounds disengenuous. To assert, as you do, that the creation of help-centres for drug addicts would actually compound the drug problem, is uncannily similar to Mr & Mrs Dailymail of suburbia warning that the asylum-seeker hostel that is to be built near them will only encourage more asylum-seekers!
Of course it is pointless to create help-centres in our street, or anywhere, without removing the dealers - ideally locked up for lengthy sentences. But the idea that help-centres for drug addicts are actually going to compound the drug problem just because they have been established where the drug addicts are (and where you and I happen to live too) is just plain silly!
Donna Ferentes
13-08-2002, 13:08
Originally posted by editor
Face it: you don't give a fucking shit about the people who live on Coldharbour Lane, do you?
I might be new both to this forum and to Brixton, but surely this is well out of order, whether or not it comes from the editor, as a means of responding to a well-argued proposal?
Firstly, it risks turning a serious discussion into a flame war. Secondly, do we really need more of the sort of politics by which if a socialist says something other than "crackdown", they aren't supposed to give a damn, we can call them nice middle class people living somewhere posh who don't know or care about the ordinary people?
That's precisely the way debates on social policy have been conducted these last two decades, and where has it got us? Homeless people injecting drugs all over London (and elsewhere). Would it not be possible to give it a break, and to debate what people say on its merits?
For what it's worth, I'm a socialist too, and live on Appach Road, well away from the scene, so conceivably I don't give a shit either.
Mike (Ed) - I really think Justin has a point here. I can really sympathise that you may be stressed about your block at the moment. But I think you should calm down abit. I hope this doesn't piss you off more. I'm not on a wind-up. :)
Donna Ferentes
13-08-2002, 13:38
Orwell wrote of Franz Borkenau (I think) that he had succeeded in the difficult task of writing a book about the Spanish Civil War "without losing his temper". Without wishing to be at all sanctimonious, isn't that the most important facet of any approach to any problem, and the more desperate and dangerous the problem, the more important it is to keep our heads? (I say that as somebody with an appalling, atrocious temper.)
So far Editor, you have not provided a convincing alternative to what Trotboy has suggested.
You clearly haven't been paying attention.
I've listed various reasons why I think that situating such a centre on Coldharbour Lane would be detrimental to the community - some people agree with those reasons, some don't (so are they all 'anti-asylum seeking, Daily Mail readers' too?).
And as for alternatives, perhaps you missed these:
(a) My ideal solution ("specialist centres out in the countryside where addicts could get full treatment, education, health care and job skills training, away from the dealers.!)
(b) My compromise: ("I'd suggest it would make more sense to have a treatment area in a non-residential area, preferably situated outside the main drug dealing area of Coldharbour Lane, away from preying dealers.")
(c) Endorsed the idea of providing an 'info/help shop' somewhere close to the station, offering help and advice to addicts,
Apart from suggesting a different location, why aren't my posts every bit as 'convincing' as Trotboy's 'stick it on Coldharbour Lane' line?
It's clear that there's a lot of different opinions being expressed here, but accusing someone of having a 'Daily Mail' mindset just because their opinions aren't in line with yours is both dishonest and extremely stupid.
And I apologise to Trotboy for swearing earlier, but I do get really fed up with people thinking that the residents of Coldharbour Lame are fair game for developments that they wouldn't like to see in their own street.
I'm fucking fed up with crackheads kicking in the doors of my block, junkies injecting on the lawn outside and finding needles and shit all over the little piece of green outside my flat.
I also get fed up with trite accusations of NIMBY-ism and holding opinions supposedly akin to'anti-asylum-seeking Daily Mail readers': two disgusting, downright lies guaranteed to inflame someone like me and - IMO - far worse than using a naughty word!
Donna Ferentes
13-08-2002, 13:51
Is there actually any way to keep people away from dealers if they really need their drug? I mean given the lengths people are prepared to go to, and the risks they are prepared to run, to get hold of a drug, would putting a centre a few miles away - or even out in the countryside - actually make a difference insofar as that aspect is concerned? And besides, wouldn't the dealers just move to be nearer the market? Which I agree might be just the ticket as far as the Coldharbour Lane residents are concerned!
(Incidentally, it's not the swearing which bothers me, it's the "you don't care" bit. I've been a socialist for nearly twenty-five years now and it really does wear you down, the way you aren't allowed to debate your ideas without having to go through a torrent of accusations first.)
If the junkies were getting treatment out in the country, I think it's far less likely that the village high street would be littered with dealers shouting, "YO! SENSI! WEED! BROWN!".
Dealers are generally lazy fuckers looking for easy money - why take the risk of becoming highly visible to the poice in an unfamiliar area when you can deal drugs in your local street with far less hassle?
And Justin: you seem to have mistaken my attack on Trotboy as some sort of attack on all socialists everywhere.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
I was arguing with him solely about his comments and his opinions in this thread, and not the Socialist-whatever party it is he represents, so relax, eh?
Most of us get that kind of flack in the 'real world' too, you know....
Donna Ferentes
13-08-2002, 14:04
Originally posted by editor
If the junkies were getting treatment out in the country, I think it's far less likely that the village high street would be littered with dealers shouting, "YO! SENSI! WEED! BROWN!".
Perhaps the vocabulary would be different, but do you really think it's hard to get hold of any of these substances in little counrty towns? Nor are they that far away, and to be honest the on-costs involved in getting to the market can be more easily passed on to the customer if the number of suppliers is diminished.
I see you wish to pursue this point. OK...
Yes, you can get smack in country towns and villages, but the difference is that people are far less anonymous and therefore fresh teams of dealers moving in to the area are much more likely to be spotted.
I'd imagine most treatment centres would be residential anyway, and although it's never impossible to smuggle in drugs, I'm confident that it would still be considerably harder to score smack in Little Bleckinsworth than in Brixton.
Of course, the whole point of siting a residential treatment away from urban areas is to also remove the immense temptation from dealers and fellow junkies on the streets and gave addicts a suitably relaxed, healthy and positive environment to try and escape their addiction.
After all, it was only a short while ago I was watching addicts go in and out of a central London hospital, doggedly checking themselves in for treatment only to give in to temptation and dash off down to Brixton to score.
But if you think residential treatment centres out of London are a terrible idea, fine.
What's your solution?
Donna Ferentes
13-08-2002, 14:26
Originally posted by editor
But if you think residential treatment centres out of London are a terrible idea, fine.
I wasn't aware that I said they were. What I said was "would putting a centre a few miles away - or even out in the countryside - actually make a difference insofar as that aspect is concerned?"
Which I'd stand by. I mean if we can take a substance all the way from Afghanistan or Colombia and get it to Brixton through many different pairs of hands, I can't see another few miles being that insuperable an obstacle. As for centres being "residential" - does that mean people aren't allowed out? I'm not being picky, I'm just not sure what you mean. Because if they're allowed out, they'll find what they're looking for.
As far as "solutions" are concerened, I think treatment centres are important, I just don't really think location makes much difference. I'm not sure on what levels you're talking about "solutions" though, as it obviously makesa difference whether we're talking micro or macro, whether we're talking "given a free hand" or whether we're restricted to whatever we might persuade the current government to do in the current circumstances. Not trying to be difficult, just not sure of the terms here and don't want to waste your time.
I'd really like it if you just offered what you believe to be the best solution to Brixton's problems instead of answering questions with more questions, a la politicians.
Mr Retro
13-08-2002, 14:37
After all, it was only a short while ago I was watching addicts go in and out of a central London hospital, doggedly checking themselves in for treatment only to give in to temptation and dash off down to Brixton to score.
Thats the problem having a treatment centre near the problem.
I believe there should be all the help in the world made as available as possible where addicts are hanging out - but trying to treat them so near temptation will result in what the Ed said above.
I also think when a person "turns themselves in" the treatment centres should be almost like a prision for the first 5-7 days or so. I know if I was in the sad desperate situation I see the junkies of Brixton in, I would want a van to pull up and lock me away for a month untill the habit is broken.
So, I'd suggest it would make more sense to have a treatment area in a non-residential area, preferably situated outside the main drug dealing area of Coldharbour Lane, away from preying dealers.
Nowhere is going to be ideal but how about the huge abandoned South London Hospital in Clapham South. A big decaying building like that is a disgrace.
What about this:
"People in a state of crisis (or just totally fucked) can't even organise themselves to go one stop on the tube half the time so (a centre) elsewhere wouldn't help those here".
Things sound pretty grim in the Barrier at the moment Mike. I'm sorry to hear all this. Estate architecture, even with security (if it doesn't really work) doesn't help does it? Is there anything you can do with other residents to get the security holes plugged?
I disagree: most smack addicts appear more than capable of getting around to do whatever they need to feed their habit.
After all, there's been the well documented cases of junkies regularly bunking the BR train from Brixton to Victoria to beg for the day and then coming back to Brixton to score.
As for the Barrier, there's not a lot we can do: smack/crackheads lurk by the entrance and hop in whenever someone's let in or ring the doors to get someone else to let them in.
Mind you, I wish I'd had a camera to hand last week when this completely spaced out crackhead was buzzing my videophone: his face was a bug-eyed picture of fired-up, coke fuelled determination that was made more weird by his insistence of looking right up to the camera!
I suspect even the most liberal, laid back resident in the world wouldn't have let that character in!
Maybees we're getting a tad polarised. Nimbyism or not, I think a lotof people would argue that the centre of Brixton is not an ideal place for a treatment centre. People need to be taken out of their usual surroundings to make a fresh break.
But access to treatment, with transport, in the centre of Brixton is another matter. It could also act as a drugs information point. And health centre for addicts.
I understand that a lot of GP's are reluctant to prescribe substitute drugs cos they don't want their waiting rooms filling up with junkies - perhaps a clinic on the premises could be included too?
Above all, I think the message is important. We're not going to put up with this stuff in the centre of town - but we're going to help people too. As someone said "Screw the dealers - help the addicts"
Alternatively, a nice spanking mobile info centre/referal point/needle exchange/clinic that could park up in town, but tour the estates too.
Whatever - I suggest we develop this thread and then send it to the people who've got £1.2m to spend by next March.
Donna Ferentes
13-08-2002, 15:09
Originally posted by editor
I'd really like it if you just offered what you believe to be the best solution to Brixton's problems instead of answering questions with more questions, a la politicians.
Yes, but I don't know what the question is, do I? That was my point. Am I being asked "what can be done now, in the current situation, within current political channels and with current budgets, to help Brixton" or do I have more leeway than that? I thought I'd made that clear.
We read that shooting galleries in places like Zurich and Toronto have helped with reducing the harm users inflict on the wider community. Does anyone know whether these were sited in areas plagued by users, or away in less troubled areas?
Intuitively it seems to me that if the problem is on CHL, then that's where the solution will be located. But there must be evidence from the experiences elsewhere in the world.
A reminder of some recent history:
Free, clean needles were dispensed from the chemist opposite my flat.
A clearly-marked sharps box was installed on the wall of my building.
So far, so good.
End result:
1. Junkies openly shooting up in front of a residential block, day and night.
2. Cover-offering attractive trees and bushes cut down in an attempt to get addicts to shoot up elsewhere.
3. Junkies ignoring the sharps box and scattering their needles (and associated paraphernalia) on the grass where children play
4. Junkies making the block of flats an all night 'social centre', shooting up together and using the small landscaped area as a piss and shit toilet.
5. Junkies gaining entry to the block and shooting up in the stairs/ fire escape and hassling/frightening residents.
6. Crack heads joining in with the party, trashing doors, stairs and the fire exit to the point where it has to be closed.
I'm all for the provision of free clean needles and safe shooting galleries but I'd strongly argue that first-hand experience has clearly shown that siting them in the middle of an entirely residential area causes immense grief for locals.
I find that unacceptable.
Free heroin prescribed the NHS administered at surgeries would do a lot to reduce the heroin problem IMO.
Caspar Hauser
14-08-2002, 02:40
Newbie, the shooting galleries in Zürich are suited in residential drug hot-spot areas. At first they were strongly opposed by the residents but when the concept started to work (e.g. brought the Junkies off the streets) that changed.
But then that places there are staffed with social workers and nurses, so the Junkies are not left on their own.
You list the problems in your area caused by addicts, and they are horrifying, but none of them would be symptoms of what I was suggesting.
If a centre was provided, with a 'shooting gallery', medical staff, prescribed heroin for addicts and 'social' areas, toilet facilities and security staff, then these people (And they are people - for all the problems they cause) would not need to do the things you list.
What's more, the Police would be able to do something with anyone who did cause problems. At the moment, the Police ignore these problems, because there is nothing they can do with the perpetrators, they don't have facilities to deal with junkies.
Certainly residential centres for referral can and should be elsewhere. But the first step - getting people off the streets and into an environment that makes them confront their problems and offers them an alternative - has to be made where the problem is.
Junkies won't immediately all form a line and get the help they need, and as your problems show - just providing some cosmetic answers to the symptoms is no solution. Particularly since the Chemist has been closed for at least a year now, but a Chemist can't provide anything other than free needles.
I'm not suggesting the problem be 'dumped on your doorstep' Mike - the problem clearly ALREADY IS on your doorstep. However big the broom you use, it won't solve the problem long term, to do that you have to treat the disease as well as the symptoms. Giving people jobs, homes, hope instead of despair is the only way to do that.
Steve Bush,
Lambeth Socialist Party.
William of Walworth
14-08-2002, 10:43
I have to say that that post from Steve was excellent, as an ideal to aim for at least. Am I wrong, or does it seem to square the circle between Mike's position (which I totally sympathise with, we are so lucky in Southwark!!) and Steve's ... the two "reasonable" poles which JWH and Mrs M put their finger on.
I suppose the main problem is whether the policy Steve suggests is achievable in anything like the short term?
I await more posts from others more locally informed than I ... excellent debate on a vital subject this thread.
The truth is we're almost in total agreement on this, but I guess I veer towards a more pragmatic approach.
I wouldn't have a problem if a well funded, professionally run, secure medical centre was set up in Coldharbour Lane as part of a co-ordinated scheme to offer full support for addicts, from health problems to housing to job retraining/education.
Trouble is, I have a very strong suspicion that it would end up as the usual half-hearted, cash-strapped botch, making life considerably worse for residents - much like the half-baked free needles/sharps box scheme outside my flat that simply invited addicts to use the place as a shooting gallery.
And on a different note, who would be expected to fund such an expensive project? Would it be right for Lambeth's funds to be diverted from other health care concerns to fund heroin treatment centres?
Originally posted by editor
You clearly haven't been paying attention.....
Not being paying attention? Well I'm sorry you think that, I have been trying to.
This NIMBYism has clearly touched a nerve. But you know perfectly well that I am not 'dishonestly' or 'extremely stupidly' accusing you of that. For the record let me state that I do not think that you are guilty of it, I was just drawing a comparison. Happy? However, without suggesting an alternative location then that is just what YOU have been sounding like!
Yes, you have listed some reasons why you think situating such a centre on Coldharbour Lane or locally would be detrimental to the community, but they're not credible in my opinion! I personally don't see how it could get much worse as it is now!
I think it is nonsense to suggest that the establishing of a help-centre, coupled with the appropriate treatment for addicts AND the removal by the police of the dealers from the street, would compound the problem.
It would not, it would on the contrary very much alleviate it. And anyway, you appear to be changing you mind now:
'I wouldn't have a problem if a well funded, professionally run, secure medical centre was set up in Coldharbour Lane as part of a co-ordinated scheme to offer full support for addicts, from health problems to housing to job retraining/education. '
Huh? Hang on a moment - is that not excatly what Trotboy and myself are arguing for too?
I reckon the well-founded cynicism you express about any venture lacking the political will of the authorities and the financial resources (while probably being correct) is no reason not to try.
As to your question about who is to fund what would inevitably be an expensive project, I am afraid the answer will probably be people like you and I who live here! ie more local taxation!
No one likes that idea, but I don't think there is another way. I'd grumble as loud as the next person if more money was to be deducted from my pay, but if it meant funding a scheme like this then that would at least be some consolation.
brixtonvilla
15-08-2002, 00:05
why not put some policemen on the street after dark? On foot? Seems like they're like rocking horse shit whenever I walk through there. So they could actually STOP some of the dealers, alkies & people with mental health problems before they do anything do anything dangerous/unpleasant....just a thought.
TinyCrendon
15-08-2002, 11:35
its interesting dis stuff.
There are 2 appraoches. The waht do we do now and the cut to the chase.
Cut to the chase says: prescribe smack and crack cocaine to addicts. Why? Because it removes them from the criminal market. They are the lucrative, repeat buyers, on whom the trade rests. Occasional users, peeps who snort a line of smack twice a year are not the market. This undermines dealers/thugs, provides safe ways of taking drugs, stops epople moving around the country to areas where drugs are more `prevelent`, stops them burglarising and so on to get drugs.
I would suggest that LONG TERM these are ideas that peeps should hold dear and voice in situ's like this, with the proviso that this is a medium to long term aim.
What do you do now? This should be much more dependent on residents, i think the residents between them would work out a solution, be motivated to find a solution, be prepared to compromise, be prepared to be pragmatic, far more so that Mr Paddick, Ms Hoey, the MP, the council, the local OB. all of whom have other people's `interests` to consider, their bosses, the Mail readers they fear so etc etc.
Having been to Brix recently i can see why peeps get upset, i was interested (i never asked u mike) that dealing seems to be going on around the `new` nightspots like the DS, LB and so on. This seems to say that the dealers need/are attracted to the flow of cash/people that comes to these places. yet these places seem to attract lilttle mention, do they have a responsibility to help? do they help?
Within Brixton we already have Outreach teams (drug foccused as well as multi-disciplinary teams focussing on housing and health care etc.) these teams as is the case with everything within the sector are vastly underfunded under resourced and understaffed. There are also services very vey close to Brixton tube that offer the opportunity for rough sleepers to access primary health care housing referrals and prescribing services, a service that is unique within London. There are day centres, hostel based services and a whole plethora of agencies offering a multitude of services as well as one of the best drug projects in the country.The main problem is that many users are just not ready to engage with services a lot of the time. As an answer to Johnny wm earlier in the thread people will not even cross the road to get help if the have "bigger fish to fry" eg. going for a fix, making the money for the next fix or waiting for the initial effects of an earlier fix to wear off so that they have the ability to carry out steps a and b again. These people are notoriously hard to reach unless they are either a) in big trouble with their dealer/fellow users b)on deaths door/in hospital c) banged up in prison or about to be. Most of the time people simply don't have the time as the chaotic lifestyle they lead demands 24 hour attention also they may be to busy "enjoying themselves" if none of the above apply. There are various pots of money flying around that are already earmarked to improve, adapt and expand current services which is really positive, but the problem grows at a rate far and above the efforts being made. Truly a frustrating and sad state of affairs. :confused:
Thanks for that jonesy: the question would seem to be how to harness the real exasperation and passion that is now widespread in Brixton to ensuring that the resources do get focussed on this problem? It was astonishing that at the time of local elections this stuff, which was in the national media every day - what with the plague of "investigative" journalists that decended on Brixton - barely surfaced in the manifestos of the established parties. Where it did, they had little new on offer. Not surprisingly, voter turnout in Coldharbour ward was one of the lowest in the country - just 14%.
As for making contact with addicts, before they are at deaths door, I'd be interested in your ideas. Offer dealers community service as outreach workers (under supervision) instead of locking them up?
Adam: I entirely agree with your point that drug addiction is a health issue not a criminal one. As for what we do in the short term, see above. But I think a starting point has to be the recognition of how widespread and broad based the popular reaction to this stuff is. For that reason, the march this weekend is significant - symbolic yes, but symbols can be very powerful.
In respect of the clubs etc., on upper CHL - yes, I think both myself and Mrs M have commented elsewhere on these boards that way back, the dealing used to notoriously focussed on Railton Road. It has migrated onto CHL, almost certainly in response to the regular influx of people looking for a good night out. I don't know if the club owners take any responsibility for that. Certainly, they should be expected to chip in to any outreach centre there. Make it a condition of planning permission I'd say - I believe there are precedents in other contexts, so called "Planning Gain".
Dogstar manager Neil Kindness was on radio a while back saying that he - and other CHL club owners - recognised the additional problems that their presence introduced and were willing to pay extra to provide extra policing along their strip.
Apparently this isn't allowed (although I seem to recall other boroughs doing something similar).
The heroin/crack problem in Brixton is bordering on epidemic. I've never seen so many addicts on the streets as there are now: at times it looks like a shanty town outside Brixton tube station and the needle-strewn, crack-brewin' BR station has to one of the least appealing stations in the UK.
I agree that it's absolutely a health problem and not a criminal one. Much as I hated it when addicts were regularly congregating outside my block to inject, ringing the police seemed pointless: what on earth are they supposed to do with them?!
To sort this problem out, addicts have to be properly helped to get off their addiction and back on their feet, and that'llcome woith a heavy price, both economically and politically.
Dealers have to be stamped down hard by the forces of Babylon, and Paddick's mantra of 'help the addicts, screw the dealers' needs to made clear on the streets.
But I doubt if politicians have the nerve or the bottle to really address this problem - just look at the way they bodged the cannabis experiment!
Originally posted by editor
The heroin/crack problem in Brixton is bordering on epidemic. I've never seen so many addicts on the streets as there are now: at times it looks like a shanty town outside Brixton tube station and the needle-strewn, crack-brewin' BR station has to one of the least appealing stations in the UK.
Does this have any relevance to whether the cannabis experiment was a success or not? :confused: I mean, I thought things were getting better because of it.
The whole point of the cannabis experiment was to concentrate resources on the elements that were causing most harm to the community: i.e., crack and smack.
Sadly, once the Daily Mail and various 'family values' types shoved in their moralistic oar, the whole experiment was sidetracked into a media sideshow.
'Serious' journalists seemed more interested in whether 'GAY COP' Paddick's ex GAY boyfriend smoked a GAY spliff or not instead of try to address the real human suffering on the streets,
Instead of debating the real issues we had to put up with irrelevant, useless, publicity-hungry shits like Kate Hoey blathering out a load of bullshit about 'schoolkids being stoned'.
And they wonder why no one votes for them...
Mr Retro
15-08-2002, 20:54
Dogstar manager Neil Kindness was on radio a while back saying that he - and other CHL club owners - recognised the additional problems that their presence introduced and were willing to pay extra to provide extra policing along their strip. Apparently this isn't allowed
I don't believe the stupidity of that. Surely all the help on offer should be snapped up?
Anna Key
16-08-2002, 07:03
Originally posted by pooka
...the regular influx of people looking for a good night out. I don't know if the club owners take any responsibility for that. Certainly, they should be expected to chip in to any outreach centre there. Make it a condition of planning permission I'd say - I believe there are precedents in other contexts, so called "Planning Gain".
An intriguing idea - using section 106 planning agreements to force the upper CHL nightclubs to contribute towards the increased policing and drug rehabilitation costs caused by their presence. Interesting that Kindness has acknowledged the linkage.
Particularly as the Merrett clubs, in the form of Dogstar and Living Bar, have a proven record of breaking planning law.
But in principle it seems a good idea (and a new one). The clubs place additional strains on police resources and attract drug tourists and associated dealers. Therefore, let the clubs mitigate those costs.
One possible problem:-
At present 106 agreements (so-called because they arise from section 106 of the 1990 Planning Act) can be secret deals between a developer and the Local Authority. I believe the government is currently consulting on changing this so the Local Authority must publish the agreement.
[I also believe Ken Livingstone's been using 106 agreements big time to embed social housing provision in yuppie flat developments: a 106 deal forces the inclusion of a certain percentage of cheap rented flats in the yuppie scheme.]
The thought of Lambeth Council entering into secret deals with the Merrett establishment sends a shiver down my spine. Given their planning record it seems unreasonable to trust them an inch in this field.
Still, if Kindness/Merrett offered to pay for extra coppers and a drug treatment programme, I'd take his money. So long as the agreement was published for all the see and the community was involved in negotiating it.
I'll ask the Lambeth planners whether policing and drug rehabilitation costs could legally form part of a 106 deal. I've never heard of such a linkage but maybe it's possible.
Link (http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1990/Ukpga_19900008_en_5.htm#mdiv106) to legislation.
This ties in with the street warden scheme, funded by the Home Office. Wardens have been operating around Clapham Junction for a year or so, and apparently Lambeth is identified for the next phase. I think there is provision for additional funding from local traders, as in the Oxford St scheme, but I can't find a reference.
Thanks for that Anna - useful info
Interesting to see that Editor heard the manager of the Dogstar on the radio say that their presence introduced additional problems.This was not always the case.When Merrett(then of the Dogstar)took the Council to court because they would not give him a late license(and this was only because one Labour councillor broke ranks and voted to refuse the application along with the Tories and LibDems)his lawyer took a very different angle.He argued that the former Atlantic was a "den of iniquity"(it had gone downhill in its last years).His client had invested money in the area(forgetting the Brixton Challenge money the Dogstar received)and was regenerating a rundown area.My local councillor(New Labour)also said that the new Dogstar would help clean that corner of Brixton up.
As has already been said the new frontline is now Coldharbour Lane.I regard this as a direct result of the policies of Brixton Challenge and the Council of that time.They encouraged the emphasis on late night entertainment through grants and sympathetic planning and licensing approvals.It was always the Tories and LibDems who were much more sceptical.I think that New Labour of that time nievely believed that youthful "Cool Britannia" entrepreneurs like Merret would transform and clean the area up.They also made big promises for CCTV.This has proved to be an expensive failure.Someone like me who was sceptical of this "modernisation"was obviously someone who was not moving with the times and against change in Brixton.
I have now read most of this thread specifically Trotboy versus Editor.I feel torn as I(as someone who lives in the centre of Brixton on CL)can understand both points of view.I agree with the Editor that a treatment centre in CL will be the usual underfunded government botch up in practise.If it was done properly in the way that Trotboy suggests I would be more interested.In the long run the government could save money if proper treatment was given to addicts.I am also sick of Central Brixton being regarded as a dumping ground for everything people dont want in their area.The attitude is its your fault for living their.An example is that the Brixton Neighbourhood Forum (not urban75 but the council run organisation)in its submission to the UDP revision wants all late night entertainment centred in central Brixton.I am also sick of the dealers.I sometimes see them in the morning on Atlantic Road with the desperate junkies looking for their morning fix.I have seen junkies shoot up in the morning by the rec.My block of flats had junkies breaking in to shoot up on the stairs at one point.You can tell the difference between the junkies and the dealers as the dealers are all black and the junkies all white mediteranians.In particular the needles left lying around are never cleaned up.If you ring up the Council (as it is a health hazard)they take days to come around to take them away.Some councils have a needle patrol whose sole job is to go around and remove needles.
This problem is also found across the West End.One of the posts pointed out that the junkies move around different areas.This usually happens when the police(after complaints from local residents in a particular area)sweep an area.The junkies and their dealers move around Kings Cross,Covent Garden,Soho.
It looks like Brixton is becoming part of this loop.
I was listening to a programme about addiction which made several interesting points.
1. Addiction is part of a way of life.GIs from the Vietnam war who used hard drugs stopped(usually)when they came back.The reason was they were back in their original lives.It has been found that addicts can be cleaned up but once they leave a treatment centre if they return to their original friends they get drawn back into junkie way of life.
2. The cost of hard drugs causes crime.A doctor on the programme who treated addicts pointed this out.Someone who is addicted to alcohol does not need to steal all the time(they might beg but thats not stealing)as drink is cheap.A wealthy person might use hard drugs his/her personal life might be affected but they do not cause crime.Street drinkers(who kill themselves slowly)get a lot less attention as whilst they can be a nuisance do not cause half the social problems of junkies.
Therefore I have two proposals :
1. Legalise all drugs hard or soft and make them affordable so people do not have to steal and get drugs off gangstas.
2. As Trotboy suggests set up treatment centres for addict of hard drugs.These have to be given proper long term funding for the complete rehab of addicts of hard drugs.
Is it not the case that if we are serious about finding an effective solution to the hard drug related menace that plagues areas like CHL and Brixton, then we have to be prepared to be taxed more?
All of the sensible ideas that posters have forwarded here essentially come down to one thing - funding!
At the end of the day how well we address and tackle this problem will depend on how much more the average joe in the street is prepared to contribute.
Quite frankly, it is looking grim.
Anna Key
17-08-2002, 11:38
Originally posted by fanta
... At the end of the day how well we address and tackle this problem will depend on how much more the average joe in the street is prepared to contribute.
Couldn't agree more.
It's also a powerful argument for pre-Thatcher uncapped local democracy with tax-raising powers. Most European countries have this. Why can't the poor old Brits?
I can easily imagine Lambeth people voting to pay a bit more Council Tax to mitigate the problems highlighted on this thread. A large proportion of the borough's population is on 100% CTAX benefit anyway, so it wouldn't actually cost them anything!
It would also be good if a locally elected politician could contribute to this thread, and maybe link it to the expensive Lambeth Council web site which, incidentally, is covered in stuff about the Council embracing 'open government.'
It's bizarre and somewhat surreal that an unelected senior police officer, Brian Paddick, talks directly to the community, while the elected people fail to do so, yet bang-on about 'open government' on a web site which we pay for!
Originally posted by Anna Key
It's bizarre and somewhat surreal that an unelected senior police officer, Brian Paddick, talks directly to the community, while the elected people fail to do so, yet bang-on about 'open government' on a web site which we pay for!
A very good point that needs driving home to one Ms K Hoey, I think.
I fail to understand the argument that "we" should pay to clean up a mess that is not our fault.Lambeth is one of the poorest boroughs in the country with a concentration of social problems.The wealthy who can afford to live in nice protected areas should be made to cough up.Also as I have said before Brixton has been subject to various (expensive) initiatives that have failed to sort out these problems(whilst promising to do so).The money that is available is not used wisely.There is also not the long term commitment.I also question whether money is the only issue.The Heroin/Crack problem is also a more recent social problem.
I talked to a friend today and he backed up some of the comments of the editor.Brighton is the Heroin capital of the UK.It has become known as having good funded services for addicts and they have gravitated towards Brighton as a consequence.
'I fail to understand the argument that "we" should pay to clean up a mess that is not our fault.'
This is precisely the attitude that is probably the biggest impediment to ultimately solving the problem.
Gramsci - it is called being socially responsible!
People who are in hospital or are receiving treatment for terrible ailments like aids and cancer are not there becuase it is 'my' fault, yet who would say they should fare for themselves apart from the Anne Widdecombes of this world?
Taken to it's logical conclusion, your 'failure to understand' our collective responsibility leads to dishonest malicious initiatives like Thatcher's 'care in the community' which was a euphemism for abandoning the mentally ill.
Of course the rich could and should contribute more (has that not always been the case?) - how do you propose to make them?
I do not doubt you're right about money being spent foolishly in the past, but this is not a reason to tighten the purse strings. Rather, spending should perhaps be directed with consultation with those whose expertise and focus lies with caring for addicts NOT career-minded politicos.
So what if addicts are attracted to Brighton because that town has better than normal treatment. That is surely a good thing, certainly better than addicts staying where treatment is less than adequate, right? Better more effective treatment means less drug related crime I would have thought.
Do we want the probelm solved?
Yes? How much are we all willing to spend then?
Mrs Magpie
19-08-2002, 23:59
Originally posted by Gramsci
You can tell the difference between the junkies and the dealers as the dealers are all black and the junkies all white mediteranians.
This is actually a sweeping generalisation and I know it not to be the case....there are plently of white british junkies, there are white british dealers, as well as Portuguese dealers, and I know of at least one black junkie (not crackhead) too.....and that's just what I have observed...I'm sure there is plenty of stuff that the beady eyed Magpie misses as well.
I think you all do need to take action to sort out the problems with drug sales and use in the area.
A two fold approach of providing free smack under clinical conditions nearby coupled with a community action type action ie wallop any person leaving needles about or indeed offering smack for sale.
Bit tricky to do in practice as a lot of the dealers have access to arms and are stupid enough to use them coupled with a spineless govt who are not brave enough to go down the clinical shooting gallery type road.
But lots of communites have taken action against dealers and users and given the state of Brixton at the mo I think hard measures are called for.
Good luck!
<TC snug/smug in Suburbs>:)
John Wisehammer
20-08-2002, 10:35
"a nice spanking mobile info centre/referal point/needle exchange/clinic that could park up in town, but tour the estates too"
This happens in a small Russian city I was in last year - by all accounts, it works relatively well (and, astonishingly, has the support of the police chief).
John Wisehammer
20-08-2002, 10:43
Hold on, Fanta - I think one of us has misread Gramsci - I thought s/he was saying that it's not fair to make Lambethians pay lots to clear up a national drugs problem that has manifested itself in Brixton, not that "junkie scum should pay themselves, not my problem" sort of line.
Can you clarify, gramsci?
A reply to Fanta and Mrs Magpie
My objection when people start saying "we" should pay more to deal with the Drugs problem in Lambeth is as I thought I clearly stated in my piece that Lambeth is a poor borough and that the wealthy should pay more.The idea of "collective responsibility" in a post Thatcherite age has almost disappeared.The gap between rich and poor increased under Thatcher.This was intentional to provide people with (under her ideology) an incentive to work harder.The New Labour governments Third Way has done very little to close this gap.Talking about "we" and "social responsibility" in a country as unequal as this sounds like Blair going on about rights and responsibilities.It seems to me the wealthy have all the "rights" and the poor the "responsibilities" in actual practise.Managing Directors who live in nice little executive devolopments in the home counties dont have to deal with the crap that those who live in Brixton do everyday.They can buy themselves out of it.
I also put forward a radical plan to try to solve the situation by legalising all drugs.This would take away the gangster element and stop theft to fund a drug habit.I thought this was a potentially socially responsible way to start to solve the problem but Fanta ignored this part of my argument on a previous post on this thread.I did state that in the discussion between Trotboy and the Editor on this thread I could sympathise with both sides.
Fanta talks about collective responsibility and then asks me how to make the wealthy pay their share!Surely Fanta should answer this question before criticising me.The problem is any form of government that proposes a radical redistribution of wealth and power will be nobbled from the start.An example is Brazil where a left wing canditate may become President.There is already a threat of a flight of capital from the country.Perhaps our present form of democracy is to limited.
As for Mrs Magpie saying that I was making sweeping generalisations on the ethnicity of the junkies/dealers I was only talking about my small part of Brixton(the market area).When I walk through Brixton its always Black guys who offer me drugs on the street.Everytime I see a junkie trying to shoot up they are always white around my area.
I brought the Brighton example up as the Editor had made a similar point on a previous post.A needle exchange outside his block of flats had according to him made the situation worse not better in his area.I was not saying that I support the Anne Widdecombe mentality.What I would like to suggest is that a lot of these initiatives whilst providing humane services do not solve the problem at all.Which is why I am arguing for a much more radical solution-complete legalisation(see my previous posts on this thread).
After all people kill themselves legally (or shorten their lives )by smoking and over drinking without recourse to gun toting dealers or stealing to fund an expensive habit.Their is no logical drugs policyin this country.Also their are drugs that are considered "hard" like Cocaine and E which whilst having some dangers I dont see why people should not be allowed to take recreationally.All life contains risk.I think people should be fully informed and make their own choices.
Mrs Magpie
22-08-2002, 20:27
Originally posted by Gramsci
As for Mrs Magpie saying that I was making sweeping generalisations on the ethnicity of the junkies/dealers I was only talking about my small part of Brixton(the market area).When I walk through Brixton its always Black guys who offer me drugs on the street.Everytime I see a junkie trying to shoot up they are always white around my area. I am talking about the area in the Atlantic Road, Coldharbour Lane, Brixton Road triangle......I do know one of the homeless Junkies quite well, and sometimes sit with her chatting for quite long periods, and I see who offers her Junk, the people she knows and fixes up with. Also because I am 'invisible' ie middle-aged, anonymous looking woman with shopping bags who spends a lot of time in queues, bus stops, waiting for my kids etc etc and am also very observant I just see all this...I have lived here for a long time and just notice what goes on.....I am very rarely offered drugs on the street so I am not using that as my criteria as who is a dealer or not...dealers just don't see me as a customer...they don't see me at all really..but I see them.....
1.I've seen black and white people comotose in Brixton with needles sticking out of them.
2. 75% of local government spending comes from central government, a does 100% of special initiative money eg Brixton Challenge, £5.4 bn Neighbourhood Renewal, the £1.2m "crack" money.
I would suggest closed circuit TV, using hidden cameras, on the stretch of Coldharbour Lane between the Dogstar and the Kentucky Fried Chicken.
Fit the cameras into the walls, on the roofs of buildings, in order to build up a picture of the active dealers in the area. Fit microphones up in obvious dealing areas.
Monitor the situation. Use MI5 agents.
Move in when your intelligence is sufficient, after a period of maybe even a year, utilising the army. Work out who is armed (infra-red/radiographic imagery) and who is "grass roots" dealer. Discern who is selling what to whom.
It is a war, the crack trade, a war against every decent human being who lives there.
Cut off the supply and demand of dealers to Coldharbour Lane.. even temporarily this would be a healthy thing. Free the weed guys, and the crack dealers, well, use your imagination.... I won't spell it out... though forcing them all to share a small cell would soon half the paperwork I would have thought.
As for potholes in the roads in Lambeth, well... it wouldn't be Lambeth without it's shitty road/pavement surfaces now would it....?
Oh, and reinstate Brian Paddick.
pk
Originally posted by Gramsci
A reply to Fanta and Mrs Magpie
Fanta talks about collective responsibility and then asks me how to make the wealthy pay their share!Surely Fanta should answer this question before criticising me.The problem is any form of government that proposes a radical redistribution of wealth and power will be nobbled from the start.An example is Brazil where a left wing canditate may become President.There is already a threat of a flight of capital from the country.Perhaps our present form of democracy is to limited.
Fair enough. The truth is I don't know how Gramsci!
My point is I don't think there is a realistic way for us to make the better-off contribute what they could and should afford to. I agree with you - no political party seems able to get into power these days on a platform of 'we would tax more to spend more'. The only people who get into power - like Blair - do so with an assurance and nod that what they do in office will not hurt the greedy and the mean too much
Hell will freeze over while we're waiting for the comfortably well-off to dig deeper, in the meantime the problem on our streets deteriorates. Given the situation, what else can be done but that local people make a start? If that means the cost of tackling it is met in the instance by locals in Lambeth, then though I'd whinge like everybody else, I think I would ultimately support it.
(PS - I know you're nothing like the horrendous Widdecombe ;) )
HurryUpHarry
25-08-2002, 13:35
seeing as Brixton is Brixton and everyone is fascinated by drugs nowadays - why not use Brixton's reputation and turn it into a theme park for drugs? Not the actual drugs themselves but the simulated experience; rides etc; movies; installations...The Albert/Granville Arcade/Electric Avenue could be dope; a big helter skelter; lots of bean bags and coloured oil lights; tressel tables selling stodgy sweet cakes, wobbly salvador dali clocks that go at half the speed; dangling conversational threads hanging off walls that no one can be bothered to pick up but that look nice; beer that was twice the price because you'd forgotten to pay for your last; soggy mirrors and all the walls would be bent. The overground station could be crack - here you have to pay up front, shout a lot, run around - everyone would steal each others clothes and have to sleep with each other to get them back. It would all end up in a fight. The underground station and its surrounds would be smack - with those gravitational rides at fun fairs shaped like hypodermics and groups of disneyland style workers dressed in shawls and carrying scythes. Brockwell Park could be acid - people wondering about on their own in nature. And Windrush Gardens ecstacy - a sort of wimpy version of the same...Living Dogstar etc could be coke - everyone talking to eachother, in expensive clothes, no one listening. And the Beehive speed, everyone talking to eachother in cheap clothes, no one listening, etc etc....
Anna Key
25-08-2002, 14:21
Originally posted by HurryUpHarry
seeing as Brixton is Brixton and everyone is fascinated by drugs...
I know who you are! Or should I say "Your Majesty?"
Lets face it folks the wasted, junky heaps of flesh posing as human dont give a fuck about the people who live CHL.
I have wasted a vaste part of my life shooting smack into meself so I feel perhaps a little insight into the way that works will help.
I have been a junkie in Ibiza-everyone scored round the Gypsy/Gaetano area, Sa Penya, then used to go hit up on the cliffs-the cops let anyone into the district but blockaded the way out, so that the rich, very often foriegn owners of the big yachts etc didn't get any wierd fucks hanging round em banging up. There was a cave half way down the cliff, 40-50ft drop just outside it.
One day some Spanish geezer a speedball fiend(thats smack and coke kiddies, by the way, the needle fiends of Sarf Lunnon have worked out how to disolve rocks so they are doing a mix of smack an crack these days-Ikid you not!!) fell down the cliff. He landed in a bed of used works around 8-9ft deep-thats used spikes full of good knows who's rotting blood. Anyway when the ambulance guys got there they refused to go in to get him out, two other junkies were threatened by the Gaurdia, so they went<you move if the Guardia say so, BELIEVE!!>. This kinda shit is coming, unless something happens.
Seriously it is very much a Mediterranian thing, this hittin up in the open air, never used to happen here, but I've seen it all over Spain, an all the Italians I used to knock round with in Kings Cross(I lived in Caledonian road for 5years) told me it was the same at home.
I have no answers but forcibly takin off the street may be the only way, Junkies dont give a fuck, almost by definition- and you DEFINATELY have to be away from home ground for a while, otherwise you have no chance to stay away from it.
Good luck Mike, in the meantime I suggest you get a good hose with a controllable nozzle, then soak the fucks, they DONT like it, an it may just remind em other people exist.
Originally posted by John Wisehammer
"a nice spanking mobile info centre/referal point/needle exchange/clinic that could park up in town, but tour the estates too"
This happens in a small Russian city I was in last year - by all accounts, it works relatively well (and, astonishingly, has the support of the police chief).
This happens in Brixton too but has had to move it's location on several occassions due to objections from local residents. this too has the support of the local police chief
Interested to hear from Mike whether things are still quite so bad outside his flats now as they were when this thread was new last summer.
Thought I'd contribute a little story about sorting out a junky related problem in my flats this week. About a week ago a couple of junkies broke into and started squatting the electricity cupboard at the bottom of my staircase (about 10 foot long and 4 wide concrete box so not the classiest squat) - causing all sorts of problems. My neighbour's son (aged 10ish) was too scared to go down the stairs of the flats past these guys - which is bad in itself and worse since his grandad lives pretty much opposite the bottom of the stairs. My neighbour (we'll call her Mrs M) Mrs M complained to the housing office who promised to do something, but after a couple of days had done fuck all. Mrs M then happened to bump into me when I was coming home Tuesday night (I'd not seen this all since I'd happened to use the other stairs to my flat all week) and let me know this. I got onto my local councillor and within 24 hours it was fixed (although they didn't fix it in the way that they promised him so there's a secondary complaint going on about that).
My point is that a) Lambeth council is still so rubbish they don't do stuff unless they're given a kick, b) if my neighbour had had the confidence / knowledge of how to contact our councillor it would have been sorted out earlier on, c) if my local councillor hadn't got onto it we'd have been fucked. Would be interested in people's comments - I think this simply shows at a very local level how very small numbers of people who are confident/informed/active can make a fairly big difference to the quality of life locally.
IntoStella
16-01-2004, 14:42
My point is that a) Lambeth council is still so rubbish they don't do stuff unless they're given a kick, b) if my neighbour had had the confidence / knowledge of how to contact our councillor it would have been sorted out earlier on, c) if my local councillor hadn't got onto it we'd have been fucked. Would be interested in people's comments - I think this simply shows at a very local level how very small numbers of people who are confident/informed/active can make a fairly big difference to the quality of life locally. Completely agree. The council is rubbish unless kicked up the arse but individual councillors can be enormously helpful. The problem is that a lot of people don't think there is any point in contacting their councillors or going to their surgeries. One of the things we've been doing in the Rushcroft road area is getting across the idea to people that it is worthwhile doing this and that things can be changed for the better.
i am happily surprised that the library has actually changed much for the better, it got nicely refurbished and there is free internet and computer use available which gives it a whole new library-experience...
Streathamite
19-01-2004, 14:14
make ALL community service orders handed out at the local magistrates courts relate to clean-up duties.
poster342002
19-01-2004, 14:24
It does seem to have gotten a little better during recent months. The period from 2000 - 2002 (inclusive) was undoubtedly the worst I have ever known it to get in my long time in Brixton - and I've been around in Brixton since the late 70's. Thankfully, things appear to be going in the right direction at last - let's hope it keeps up. :)
Brixton Hatter
20-01-2004, 14:07
The period from 2000 - 2002 (inclusive) was undoubtedly the worst I have ever known it
I think I'd agree with that. I'm interested to hear what Mike thinks, seeing as some of the worst problems seemed to be concentrated around his block - and also whether the crime stats hold out any improvement.
IntoStella
20-01-2004, 15:25
The period from 2000 - 2002 (inclusive) was undoubtedly the worst I have ever known it It was bonkers! :eek: :eek: After repeated muggings I was afraid to go out on my own at night. Police were getting shipped in from god knows where who didn't know the areas they were working at all. They couldn't get a grip on the probelm and they were getting harangued by a frightened and desperate public, including, I have to admit, me :o. I had a stand up row in the street with a policeman (after my neighbour was hospitalised by a mugger) in which he ended up yelling "It's not my fucking fault!" They were completely on the defensive and firefighting -- if you'll pardon the mixed metaphor! :eek: It was a nightmare.
poster342002
20-01-2004, 16:47
It was bonkers! :eek: :eek: After repeated muggings I was afraid to go out on my own at night. Police were getting shipped in from god knows where who didn't know the areas they were working at all. They couldn't get a grip on the probelm and they were getting harangued by a frightened and desperate public, including, I have to admit, me :o. I had a stand up row in the street with a policeman (after my neighbour was hospitalised by a mugger) in which he ended up yelling "It's not my fucking fault!" They were completely on the defensive and firefighting -- if you'll pardon the mixed metaphor! :eek: It was a nightmare.
I honestly feel that a vast amount of damage was done to Brixton's atmospheare and it's reputation during that horrible period. A lot of good people moved out, sick and tired of how things had become. Almost everyone had a mugging tale or at least a near-miss.
Most of the problems appeared to be fuelled by crack and heroin and - for whatever reason - the authorities appeared to be doing bugger all about it at the time apart from putting up pretty posters. And parking a crime-reporting bus near the library or the station - never once did I see anyone go into it.
It was with a joyful sense of relief that things started - at long last - to improve in the latter part of last year. I hope we never, EVER have a return to the unpleasant mess that was those three years from 2000 - 2002.
"Most of the problems appeared to be fuelled by crack and heroin and - for whatever reason - the authorities appeared to be doing bugger all about it at the time apart from putting up pretty posters. And parking a crime-reporting bus near the library or the station - never once did I see anyone go into it".
That bloody bus looked completely unwelcoming. Like you'd go in there to grass people up or something. I don't call that outreach. :(
I almost found it impossible to believe that there had been a 63% fall in street crime over the last couple of years in Lambeth. Until I remembered that in January 2002 alone I had two sets of mates mugged round here (one couple at knifepoint right by Vauxhall tube, another on Brixton hill). Still I know of three people mugged in Lambeth last summer so it's still pretty far from being the safety of most of the UK where muggings virtually never happen.
1. Stick some huge, fuck-off lights along the dimly-lit, lone-female-worrying, drug dealer infested Electric Lane and Electric Avenue
2. Stick some huge, fuck-off lights along the stretch of Coldharbour Lane to Brixton Road
3. Install some urinals on Electric Avenue (by Iceland) as the place stinks of piss and always has done.
4. Put up a big sign that tells you the times and destinations of the overground trains at Brixton BR station
5. Put another big sign by the tube station - most people haven't a clue when and where the BR trains go
6. Rebuild the old Brixton BR third platform and the old Loughborough Park BR station on Coldharbour Lane (corner w/Barrington Rd) to allow direct route to Peckham, Lewisham etc
7. Fix the water that has dripped down on pedestrians from the rail bridge by the Dogstar since at least 1991
I'm sure you've all got some more to add to this list...!
Was it my imagination or did Electric Avenue look better lit than before when I went past the other day?
[QUOTE=Bob]I almost found it impossible to believe that there had been a 63% fall in street crime over the last couple of years in Lambeth. Until I remembered that in <snip>etc QUOTE]
I recall when I joined these boards in March 2002, the Brixton Forum was replete with "I got mugged last night" threads. At that time it was almost impossible to walk the legnth of Acre Lane without being hassled by persistent, aggressive begging of the "Give me some dosh or I might just be a mugger" type. Certainly the climate has changed.
But, we should remember that the current levels of street robbing (Robberies plus snatches) is around 400/month which is pretty much back to where it was in 1999 - and its still the highest per capita in the country (some months Hackney noses ahead).
Alot better than 960 in October 2001 tho.
Alot better than 960 in October 2001 tho.
Yes indeedy
lang rabbie
23-04-2004, 16:45
3. Install some urinals on Electric Avenue (by Iceland) as the place stinks of piss and always has done.
The Brixton Area Committee meeting on 4 May will be receiving an update on The Brixton Public Convenience Report from consultants "The British Toilet Association" (titter ye not :rolleyes: )
I just hope the final report contains fewer platitudes than this..
The summary below has been provided by the British Toilet Association in advance of the production of the draft Brixton Public Convenience Report at the end of April 2004.
Brixton Public Convenience Report Update
“Extensive field work has been undertaken, to gain a detailed knowledge of the area covered and research work has been carried out to ascertain the views of both existing and potential toilet providers, as well as toilet users – both local residents and visitors.
The report will include a range of options for future public toilet provision, covering both daytime and evening economies, together with outline costings.
Any future (enhanced) level of public toilet provision will require the full co-operation of the local community and proper enforcement of laws, which impact on this basic – but currently discretionary Local Authority public service.
Since the current poor standard of public toilet provision in Brixton (as in many other parts of the UK) is largely attributable to various forms of anti-social behaviour, the views and involvement of the Metropolitan Police are key to any improved service provision in the future.
One thing remains constant – everyone who works in or visits Brixton’s commercial centre, as well as some of those who travel through Brixton, require to use an ‘away from home’ toilet one or more times every day.
Doing nothing about current poor levels of toilet provision in Brixton is not, in our view, an option, if Brixton is to fulfil it’s potential in accordance with Lambeth Borough Council’s vision set out in the Unitary Development Plan to make ‘Lambeth a great place to live, visit and work’.
But...
Financial implications
3.1 No new source of money is presently sought.
3.2 The report cost is £9400 [:eek: LR], funded by the Brixton Area Committee Neighbourhood Renewal Environment Spend allocation of £100k for 2003/4. There is no further implication on the NRF Environment 2003/4 spend.
3.3 Future funding. The report will make detailed and costed recommendations on public convenience provision appropriate for the commercial centre of Brixton. These are anticipated to be creative financial options involving the establishment of partnerships with the potential for drawing in external sources of funding, as well as presenting best value proposals for internal allocation of existing resources.
Source: Brixton Public Convenience Update (http://www.lambeth.gov.uk/intradoc/groups/public/documents/report/025359.pdf)
1. Stick some huge, fuck-off lights along the dimly-lit, lone-female-worrying, drug dealer infested Electric Lane and Electric Avenue
2. Stick some huge, fuck-off lights along the stretch of Coldharbour Lane to Brixton Road
3. Install some urinals on Electric Avenue (by Iceland) as the place stinks of piss and always has done.
4. Put up a big sign that tells you the times and destinations of the overground trains at Brixton BR station
5. Put another big sign by the tube station - most people haven't a clue when and where the BR trains go
6. Rebuild the old Brixton BR third platform and the old Loughborough Park BR station on Coldharbour Lane (corner w/Barrington Rd) to allow direct route to Peckham, Lewisham etc
7. Fix the water that has dripped down on pedestrians from the rail bridge by the Dogstar since at least 1991
I'm sure you've all got some more to add to this list...!
I'm going to champion some of these at BAF. I think I'm in a position there to possibly make a difference now.
However - this is not a "sort out Brixton plan". It is some ideas for the built environment. Good ideas, and ones I'd agree with (particularly as a man obsessed with detail), but it doesn't address deep social issues - that would "sort out Brixton".
Not a dig - just saying it would be better calling this, "My seven point tidy-up Brixton plan" :)
RatuntaMcBlart
19-05-2004, 11:02
I'm going to champion some of these at BAF. I think I'm in a position there to possibly make a difference now.
However - this is not a "sort out Brixton plan". It is some ideas for the built environment. Good ideas, and ones I'd agree with (particularly as a man obsessed with detail), but it doesn't address deep social issues - that would "sort out Brixton".
Not a dig - just saying it would be better calling this, "My seven point tidy-up Brixton plan" :)
I would've thought any improvements made to Brixton's social and environmental issues could only serve to accelerate its gentrification. The more word gets out that Brixton is "up and coming", the more snotty people are going to see it as an option as a place to live. And with snotty ass restaurants like Atlantic 66 opening and getting write-ups in the Evening Blandard, I think the only way to prevent the place getting too good a name for itself is to keep the streets as badly lit, as dangerous to the non-streetwise and as smelling of piss as possible. Wouldn't you agree that improving the quality of life in Brixton will in turn lead to a greater influx of people rich enough to choose where they live?
It's called "inclusive regeneration". Improvements to public/community space that are for everyone. This can push or aid gentrification a little, but that's just tough. There's no reason why ordinary people here shouldn't have the best.
You do realise don't you that your stupid comments didn't really deserve a reply.
But if you want people to continue to live in dirt and poverty, perhaps I can introduce you to people who do and you can tell them yourself.
RatuntaMcBlart
19-05-2004, 11:27
It's called "inclusive regeneration". Improvements to public/community space that are for everyone. This can push or aid gentrification a little, but that's just tough. There's no reason why ordinary people here shouldn't have the best.
You do realise don't you that your stupid comments didn't really deserve a reply.
But if you want people to continue to live in dirt and poverty, perhaps I can introduce you to people who do and you can tell them yourself.
If you'd be so kind as to show me where it was even implied that I wanted people to go on living in dirt and poverty I'd be most grateful. I was merely pointing out to the people that are upset about gentrification that a huge factor in it's existence here is the improving face of the area.
IntoStella
19-05-2004, 11:28
It's called "inclusive regeneration". Improvements to public/community space that are for everyone. This can push or aid gentrification a little, but that's just tough. There's no reason why ordinary people here shouldn't have the best. Exactly. :cool: Nobody has ever suggested here (unless they were obviously joking) that Brixton's problems should be perpetuated for the sole purpose of ''keeping the yuppies out".
Some people are either too dense to grasp the distinction between (exclusive) gentrification and (inclusive) regeneration, or have their own political agendas for misrepresenting the arguments.
Ratunda - Doh! I never thought of that.
:rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Simplistc. Obvious. Some truth.... but I don't think doing up the Moorlands estate for instance has much affect on rich people - they don't go there, they wouldn't buy there.
Over and out. :)
RatuntaMcBlart
19-05-2004, 11:37
Exactly. :cool: Nobody has ever suggested here (unless they were obviously joking) that Brixton's problems should be perpetuated for the sole purpose of ''keeping the yuppies out".
I didn't suggest that anyone had suggested it.
Some people are either too dense to grasp the distinction between (exclusive) gentrification and (inclusive) regeneration, or have their own political agendas for misrepresenting the arguments.
I was making my own argument, not misrepresenting anyone elses. I was making an observation that the more desireable a place becomes to live the more rich people will desire it. As the dinner lady at my school used to say "You can't have yogurt AND an apple".
RatuntaMcBlart
19-05-2004, 11:39
Ratunda - Doh! I never thought of that.
:rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Simplistc. Obvious. Some truth.... but I don't think doing up the Moorlands estate for instance has much affect on rich people - they don't go there, they wouldn't buy there.
Over and out. :)
This post would've been a better follow-up to my original one n'est pas? If you'd thought it yourself, there was no need for you to jump down my throat for saying it too, you could've said "Well yeah I thought of that, but here's what I think now".
As for "simplistic", well Stella sure did a good job of completely misunderstanding it and missing the point.
vBulletin® v3.6.10, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.